Catholicism and Hypocrisy

Catholicism and Hypocrisy

I am a Roman Catholic.

I am a hypocrite.

I admit that I am a hypocrite, and so is my religion. I know that my religion killed in the name of Jesus Christ. I know that my religion did a lot of bad things in the past.

I am aware of the history of my religion. However, I still accept my religion. Some Christians may attack the Catholics for idol worship and corrupt church leaders. But, my question for them is this: who are they to question the Catholic Church?

The scripture tells us that we are all sinners, that no one has the right to throw stones unless they’re sinless. No matter how greatly we’ve sinned, we are still sinners. That makes us all sinners. You may have committed less sins compared to those who commit mortal sins, but we are all sinners in the end of the day.

That goes for all religions. All religions are imperfect. All religions are hypocrite. There is no supreme religion in this world.

Catholicism survived because we didn’t succumb to changing the religion to match our desires as humans. We created rules that are in line with the divine. However, we continued to disobey these rules. Catholic priests disobeyed rules, even Popes. Some priests had wives and children. But, did they change the rules? No.

Religions in this world should use their teachings for spiritual improvement, not as weapons to discredit the Roman Catholics.

/*/ opinion personell /*/



The Myth of Learning

The Myth of Learning

When she entered the room, Mrs. Doomsday happily announced that she would give a quiz, an unannounced quiz. Tada! Students were caught off guard. The teacher was delighted, humming while her students trembled, crammed, and skimmed through their notes.

Grabe pud ni si Devilia oy,” said Way. He and his friends, Tu and On, gave Mrs. Doomsday a cute nickname, Devilia. Way, when asked, said that it best reflects her personality as a teacher.

In the upper hemisphere of the class, Nag, Memo, and Rice are calling all the angels and saints to aid them in this battle against all evil, and the devil incarnate, Mrs. Doomsday.

Jusko lord, at least naka-memorize ko sa process,” said Nag.

Hala! Basin malimot ko sa ‘kong gi-memorize,” said Memo, Nag’s friend and classmate.

“Basta remember the mnemonic device, maka-answer ramo,” said Rice.

As she stood in front, everyone could see her joyful face as she listened to the noises caused by panic and fear. It was music to her ears. And when she distributed the paper, the aura of the room changed. The air became colder; time was moving slower; and silent prayers were being said. In every tick tock of Mrs. Doomsday’s stilettos was seconds passing by, or perhaps items that Way, Tu, and On couldn’t answer. It can also be a reminder that Nag, Memo, and Rice should keep in mind the mnemonic device, or the keywords they memorized in the definition of important terms.

To study is to learn. But, learning is not limited to studying. In fact, it expands at a large range, or perhaps life itself is under the range of learning. Things are taught in the four walls of the classroom, but not all things are learned in school.

Merriam-Webster would define “learn” this way: to gain knowledge or skill by studying, practicing, being taught, or experiencing something.

On other hand, Merriam-Webster would define “memorize” this way: to learn (something) so well that you are able to remember it perfectly.

But, how did “memorizing” equate with “learning” if the latter encompasses a larger scope than the former?

The answer is in our education system. Whenever a teacher “barely” discusses a lesson or just reads his/her slide presentation without even explaining it, students resort to pure memorization. By pure memorization, I would call it as the art of just memorizing information without asking “why is this information here?”

I myself memorize. But, there’s a difference between memorizing barely discussed facts and information than those that were properly explained and discussed. If a teacher barely discussed a lesson, through pure memorization, I can answer questions like “Who is the father of Maria Clara?” or “When did the Suez Canal open?”. But, what if the question was different. Question like “What is the best literary criticism for this short story?”, how can pure memorization help me? It is given that I know the definition of every literary criticism, but how can I use these memorized definitions to answer that question?

Now, our education system has become a playing field, not a ground for learning. Why? Some teachers think that by making their standards too high, it will make them reputable and look scholarly. But, it’s not the case. Before one sets a high standard, one must establish his/her credentials. Teachers should make themselves “believable.” Some are just trying-hard-educators. There are only a few teachers in Silliman whom I can call legit, and most of them are my teachers in arts subjects.

My teacher in religion said that learning is not a game. Giving surprise quizzes is a form of game because the teacher is merely playing with the students. It’s like the never ending chase of cat and mouse. Learning should not instill fear to the minds of the students. Coincidentally, fear starts with F of which its meaning is known to be the greatest weapon of most fear-inspired teachers. Here’s an advice: before they fail a student, they should remember if they failed their duty as teachers. Giving an F to a student who deserves that grade is an act of good faith that the teachers have done their jobs, but the students didn’t do their part. On the contrary, I shall not disclose further.

As a student, I look up to my teachers. I love them, even though I curse some of them whenever I study for a pretentious exam. Though they’re not doing their job, I can still get a lesson from them: not all people are meant to be educators.

But, my only request is that teachers should look back to the roots of learning. They should ask themselves, “why am I teaching?” Every teacher should stop and contemplate. My teacher in EL 33 always reminds me that when writing an essay, I should have a purpose. And, I would use that reference to all the teachers. What is your purpose in teaching? Why should the students look up to you? What is your aim for the students? I know that these questions can be answered by a Miss-Universe-type of answer. But, make no mistake. An answer from the heart reveals one’s true purpose, and shows pure dedication and passion.

The Right to Die

The Right to Die

A lot of individuals are suffering from diseases that are incurable. Some diseases, however, are curable, but the body of the person is too weak to recover from the sickness. Let us not put a blind eye to this situation. It is painful for the patient to endure endless treatments and undergo operations. In fact, some drugs prescribed do not cure the disease. Some are just maintenance drugs. Families spend thousands of dollars for medication, hospital bills, doctors fee etc. Some patients are weak due to old age. It is unpractical to continue medication if the body will eventually give up. Some patients, especially the aged, wanted to rest at their own consent. It is easy for the family members to say that they are financially capable. But, some are just blinded about the pain of continued medication. With all these circumstances stated, the Right to die should be given to a person.

On One’s Decision

The right to die is the decision of the patient. The doctors nor the family members should intervene with the dying patient. It is his/her right to decide for his/her life. The decision of a dying person to take his/her own life is to relieve himself/herself from the pains of medication and to reduce hospital expenses. The decision to die may affect the family or carer. Seeing a person die may be heartbreaking but it will be for the patient’s own good. If you were in the dying patient’s shoes, experiencing the pain of the therapies and medications, can you endure it until it all gets better? Can you face the fact that your determination to live is 101 percent, but your body is barely recuperating? The option to die can give the patient the eternal rest he/she deserves.

On Suicide and Murder

As mentioned, the right to choose to die can be given to the person. But it can also be linked to suicide. According to various related literature, suicide is the act of deliberately killing yourself. To put everything within the parameters of the topic, suicide is done by a person who is physically capable of killing himself. With that stated, the main subject of the topic is a dying person. Thus, does a dying person have the physical strength to kill himself/herself? No. Suicide is not considered in this matter.

It is also considered that the right to choose to die is not applicable in all situations. What if the person is unconscious? Can the family decide for the unconscious patient? The answer is yes or no. In my own opinion, there should be a law here in the Philippines that covers the topics of euthanasia, specifically voluntary or as mandated by law.

  • Voluntary Euthanasia – the law should include the right of the person to decide for his or her own life without the interference of the family members, carers, or health care professionals in the decision making. The person should be given a painless death as performed by the healthcare professionals.
  • Mandated by law – if the person is unconscious or cannot bind himself to an agreement, the law should give a required time period before doing euthanasia. For example, in my own opinion, the state shall give every dying and unconscious person 1 month before euthanasia. If he is not conscious after 1 month, the law shall declare euthanasia. The doctor who will perform euthanasia shall be provided by the government. The doctors of the patient are forbidden to interfere with the process due to pity or compassion. If on the contrary that the person is conscious before 1 month, the state shall give discounts and free medical assistance to the person.


Thus, the right to die is also the right to choose. Every person can choose what they like as long as it is not contrary to the law.